You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Phytochrome a Mediates Blue Light and UV-A-Dependent Chloroplast Gene Transcription in Green Leaves
Louis Chun, Alana Kawakami and David A. Christopher
Vol. 125, No. 4 (Apr., 2001), pp. 1957-1966
Published by: American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4279826
Page Count: 10
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
We characterized the photobiology of light-activated chloroplast transcription and transcript abundance in mature primary leaves by using the following two systems: transplastomic promoter-reporter gene fusions in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), and phytochrome (phyA, phyB, and hy2) and cryptochrome (cry1) mutants of Arabidopsis. In both dicots, blue light and UV-A radiation were the major signals that activated total chloroplast and psbA, rbcL, and 16S rrn transcription. In contrast, transcription activities in plants exposed to red and far-red light were 30% to 85% less than in blue light/UV-A, depending on the gene and plant species. Total chloroplast, psbA, and 16S rrn transcription were 60% to 80% less in the Arabidopsis phyA mutant exposed to blue light/UV-A relative to wild type, thus definitively linking phyA signaling to these photoresponses. To our knowledge, the major role of phyA in mediating the blue light/UV-A photoresponses is a new function for phyA in chloroplast biogenesis at this stage of leaf development. Although rbcL expression in plants exposed to UV-A was 50% less in the phyA mutant relative to wild type, blue light-induced rbcL expression was not significantly affected in the phyA, phyB, and cry1 mutants. However, rbcL expression in blue light was 60% less in the phytochrome chromophore mutant, hy2, relative to wild type, indicating that another phytochrome species (phyC, D, or E) was involved in blue light-induced rbcL transcription. Therefore, at least two different phytochromes, as well as phytochrome-independent photosensory pathways, mediated blue light/UV-A-induced transcription of chloroplast genes in mature leaves.
Plant Physiology © 2001 American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB)